is this legal

[javyd]

is it legal for the RSPB to advertise this women only walk and then say it’s for anyone who identifies as a woman or anyone who is non binary? So basically a mixed sex walk:

https://events.rspb.org.uk/events/96479?fbclid=IwQ0xDSwK78EFleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHuuR3UtdrATGnTTt5ySxJ2WYamEz4NDR_kaGslT5fzD6KXb0R73aBSl4iXxp_aem_Tl1LwIsISF5qJxKMiI80Bg

Although everyone is quoting the Supreme Court ruling but it only relates to the EA.

So if the organisers haven't invoked the EA presumably they can say who the walk is aimed at.

Unless and until somebody makes a complaint.

Not sure that (even though I support the idea) a women only walk would qualify as a proportionate means to meet a justifiable end. Unlike say toilets or women support services.

The problem is, this is all part of the minefield created by Stonewall etc., that has created the impression that identities etc., are as valid, real, as actual biological fact. And sadly many members of the public, not just entrenched TRAs think this is the norm.

And the fact that a charity is blithering on like this is no surprise.

So - and sorry if this has been already said - surely just a simple email to RSBP would alert them that what they have said doesn't match the Supreme court ruling.

It would be interesting to see what they say.

I suspect many people think it is just about toilers. Not about social events.

As they've explained exactly what they mean openly and fully, they aren't lying. What they are doing bears no resemblance whatsoever to your analogy.

Where does the Act say you cannot discriminate in favour of two separate protected characteristics?

Well you can, but only where it is logical.

A support service for Black women or for Black Lesbians.

It is about creating a service or "space" where people with the same characteristics feel save or supported because of their shared characteristics.

What I am not sure is if you could offer a service to Black Women and Black Lesbians.

You could have two separate walks, one for women and one for gender reassigned persons, but you can’t lump the two together and exclude men because that’s not allowed by the equality act.

I think they can lawfully offer a segregated walk to improve participation in an activity by persons who share a protected characteristic is disproportionately low. Quoting the EA itself.

As Susan of FWS - anywhere there is segregation by sex for employment, services or associations the EA is invoked. In this case the RSPB need to re-badge the event so it is clear who the walk is targetted at and if they want it trans inclusive they need to do that in a way which welcomes women and trans women but might discourage men without a feminne identity to stay away, without somehow discriminating against them. Total minefield! But when the Brighton sauna on the beach tried to have a clear advert they got a lot of abuse from TRAs even though they were simply trying to follow the law

I hope it's not against the law- that would feel like a massive overreach of the ruling. I appreciate the need for single sex spaces where necessary- toilets, prisons, etc- but I'd also like some things to be open to trans and non-binary women if- and only if- they want to be. I'd like to still be able to go to casual events aimed at women (including trans women and non-binary folks) without men being included by some legal necessity. Men's presence completely changes the atmosphere of so many groups, if this becomes commonplace I'll probably stop going to a lot of events altogether.

Organisations don’t get to decide whether they are bound by the law or not, otherwise they’d all decide they’re not and discriminate away to their hearts content!

You could!
But that would be for females which includes gender reassigned trans men. Not trans women because they are not female.

Well transmen have the protected characteristic of female sex, so they’re automatically included on that score, their gender reassignment characteristic is neither here nor there.

What's the difference between "transwomen" and "non-binary" males and other men?

The presence of any men can change the atmosphere, regardless of any special gender feelings they might have.

The problem is the Supreme Court has said in terms of discrimination, transwomen are men. In terms of sex discrimination they are no different to any other man.

You're generally not allowed to discriminate on the basis of sex. But the law understands that sometimes it's necessary. Like prisons, sports, etc.

So they allow exceptions to the rule.

Which means you can have a woman only event, that doesn't include any men - in other words it's sometimes okay to discriminate against men on the basis of their sex.

What you can't do is discriminate against men and say you're not allowed here...except some men are.

If it's women only, that's it. No men. If you want transwomen in, you have to let all men in, otherwise they can say they are being discriminated against.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

Lesbians are women, so anything for women automatically includes lesbians.

It is totally possible to have inclusive events. It is just about being clear with the marketing. But you can't ban a male if they insist on coming along too. And based on what we have seen in the last few years, it does seem likely that might happen.

Also you need to consider that to have an event for Gender Reassignment only via the EA it would only cover the 8400ish GRC holders in the entire UK as self-ID is not the law here.

I am sure that it will be possible to have inclusive events and people who are more creative than me will work out how the language can be both clear and lawful.

The PC of gender reassignment in the EA doesn't require someone to have a GRC

Well shit, guess I won't be going to many women's events any more. I don't tend to go to these things alone and it would feel nasty to start excluding one or two of my friends from everything.

I appreciate there's nothing really I, or anyone else, can do about it- the law is the law. It's just sad, I suppose, that a decision with so many positives in turn bans inclusive groups and events that have been happily existing without issue.

To the PP who asked what is different about trans women and men; in my experience almost everything? Personality, interests, empathy. Not to say that men aren't empathetic, but they don't tend to understand women's interests particularly well and tend to change the conversation topics. I didn't know my trans friends were trans for a good while so the only real difference is biology- and that tends not to affect arts and crafts or nature walking groups.

The groups you’re talking about aren’t inclusive if they’re excluding some men, but not all men. They’re discriminating unlawfully. Those types of groups will just be open to everyone in future so you can still attend.

I think it was examples of how to define an even smaller group of women by using additional "shared" protected characteristics. If you advertise just for women then all women can come. But if you go with shared protected characteristics you could reduce your group size by using:

• two = lesbians (women & sexual orientation of homosexuality)
• three = black lesbians, or
• four = black disabled lesbians or
• five = black, disabled, pregnant lesbians
• six = black, disabled, pregnant, Buddhist lesbians
• seven = black, disabled, pregnant, Buddhist lesbians, under 40
• eight = black, disabled, pregnant, Buddhist lesbians, under 40
• nine = black, disabled, pregnant, Buddhist lesbians, under 40 and in a same sex marriage.

Obviously your might be a bit lonely if you go the whole hog 😂but as a white woman I could legally be excluded

I'm sure you can go on a nature walk with your trans friends, no law can stop you doing that!

Yes sorry I'm getting in a muddle

In FWS 1 Scotgov lost straight away when they wanted trans people to self ID as women for the public boards law.
In FWS 2 Scotgov lost at the SC when they wanted GRC holders as women for the public boards law.

This made me think there was a two tier system - what am I muddling up?

I thought the issue with trans people was about sports and bathrooms? This is a walk out in public.

I dropped them an email to show them this thread should give them a laugh.

I don't think you will have to worry because there are lots of people who will want inclusive groups - they'll just be labelled differently. We just need to agree the new inclusive language/terms and it will be fine

Good. They need to understand the law. I bet the RSPB don't want to be in the papers for being sued.

I'm not surprised you don't get it. plenty of people don't understand why some women would feel rather upset when they thought they were going to an all female outing, only to find they weren't.

And there are men, of course, who might wonder why they were being excluded on the basis of their sex but some other men weren't.

Amazing how some people find illegal discrimination perfectly acceptable tho.

@mazzikid To the PP who asked what is different about trans women and men; in my experience almost everything? Personality, interests, empathy.

I would suggest that your personal experience is not enough. Another thread atm is discussing someone who would identify as (in your words) a trans woman - like your friends - but who is exhibiting
personality - forcing his way into women's toilets when he is being asked by women not to do so; aggressive disregard for the law
interests - seem to be trains, cars and planes (nothing to stop women having these interests, but you mention specifically things like arts and crafts)
empathy - seemingly absolutely none where women are concerned.

This "not my Nigel" approach cannot be the basis for policy and the organising of society.

It’s a civil matter not a criminal one.

You forgot prisons. And rape crisis centres. And domestic violence refuges. And any space or event or society labelled female or women.

You also forgot the law. However thank you for bringing the RSPB's attention to that.